The New Raith Rovers Thread

[renton]

26 minutes ago, foreverarover said:

11 hours ago, Against The Machine said:

It was a while ago now so I'm maybe not remembering all the detail, but did Bill Clark not suggest that there was a quarterly board meeting scheduled for about two days after the Goodwillie debacle and that the first item on the agenda was McGlynn's contract? It'd have been waved through at that stage, if it hadn't been for everything else that happened first. 
Rather than the conclusions of any grand Texan psychoanalysis, I suspect it's been a simple case of "get to the end of the season and worry about it then". I'm sure the bad run of form played a minor part, but more than anything I think everyone just wanted to get over the line. 
Who honestly knows what John Sim thinks these days, but taking everything into account I'd be pretty surprised if McGlynn isn't still in charge at the start of next season. 

If the attitude of the board is just to play out the season before deciding, they need a Rocket up thier arse. The two options are if he stays he should have been informed a while ago and given the chance to talk to potential players for next season. If he is being released a new manager must be in the pipeline and ready to come in quickly. I'm thus league you can't afford to dither and wait on signing players. The options are limited and you need to be in a position to act swiftly if required.

Agree fully with this. We are rapidly approaching the shit or get off the pot stage.

Nothing in the last few weeks would likely have changed the minds of the board. If the previous 12 games weren't enough to make you want rid, the last 5 would hardly change your mind. Conversely If you accepted it was a bad run from an otherwise good manager then waiting to see how the last few weeks turned out would be equally futile.

Either way, his fate should have been decided back in March at the latest, after 3 months of constant failing.

Only thing I can think is that, our owner is at odds with the BoD on direction, at this stage. Once upon a time I'd have had Sim down as the sack McGlynn chairman, but after his last Balaclava cavalry charge into the press, maybe he's trying to keep him and the board are wanting to go the other way?

[Enigma]

6 minutes ago, renton said:

after his last Balaclava cavalry charge into the press,

Half a league, half a league, half a league downward…

[McGuigan1978]

There’s no chance the future of John McGlynn has anything to do with the opinion of Rovers fans, especially the ones on Pie and Bovril. 

John Sim has demonstrated that he’s not overly fussed about the opinions of the fanbase, and in fairness, when it comes to McGlynn, I think the majority would probably keep him, even if that isn’t necessarily the overwhelming opinion on here. 

If he isn’t offered a new deal, it’ll be because the target at the start of the season was the playoffs, and after that, probably higher still when we were top in December and the target had been moved accordingly. 

Then the collapse. 

Ultimately, we’ve failed to meet the targets that the club and McGlynn appeared to be setting for themselves, and while I think McGlynn will be offered a new deal, I wouldn’t be surprised or overly disappointed if he wasn’t.

If the latter occurs, I’d say that rests on him and no-one else though. 

[Raith_Raver]

3 hours ago, foreverarover said:

Had that at the weekend, bizarre to say the least. It's maybe Raith raver with a virus because everyone thinks he's a plank.

Everyone? You mean the  gang of arseholes on here like yourself who compensate for their lack of reason and integrity with insults.

Mentioning me for no reason suggests to me you're trying to deflect how you yourself have come across.

Edited April 25, 2022 by Raith_Raver

[TxRover]

9 minutes ago, Raith_Raver said:

Everyone? You mean the  gang of arseholes on here like yourself?

Mentioning me for no reason suggests to me you're trying to deflect how you yourself have come across.

 

[basher brash]

This whole Mcglynn thing regarding the BOD set a target for at least the play offs and seriously looking at promotion ! Maybe if they gave him a realistic budget this could have been achievable for example Liam dick wasn’t our first choice clearly came down to money, failure to properly strengthen the striking department , Not offering a decent enough deal for Kieran Macdonald , I’m not stating give Mcglynn a huge budget but you can’t set unrealistic targets based on the squad we had like someone else stated the Rovers are a mid table championship club involving the occasional flutter in the play offs 

[renton]

28 minutes ago, basher brash said:

This whole Mcglynn thing regarding the BOD set a target for at least the play offs and seriously looking at promotion ! Maybe if they gave him a realistic budget this could have been achievable for example Liam dick wasn’t our first choice clearly came down to money, failure to properly strengthen the striking department , Not offering a decent enough deal for Kieran Macdonald , I’m not stating give Mcglynn a huge budget but you can’t set unrealistic targets based on the squad we had like someone else stated the Rovers are a mid table championship club involving the occasional flutter in the play offs 

Which ones?

There isn't really such a thing as a mid table championship club. If you aren't making an active attempt to go up, then you'll inevitably get sucked into the bottom.

In that respect, I've got no problem with ambition, and without knowing other clubs budgets we can't know really how well McGlynn was backed. 

For example, thinking back to the season before if we hadn't had Hearts we might well have been realistic title challengers. There is a real sense of missed opportunity this season for whatever reason, and a good chunk of that is on McGlynn. 

Edited April 26, 2022 by renton

[CALDERON]

When you pay money for 2 players, one of them being 50k, you certainly can't argue that the manager wasn't backed.

[Michael W]

Not having it that McGlynn wasn't well backed. Liam Dick may not have been first choice, but Berra will have been an expensive capture and I doubt James Keatings came cheaply either. That the latter was hopeless is neither here nor there. 

Pre-season is only one of the factors, though. We brought in players when the season was in progress, strengthening the squad in January. In came Stanton, Gullan and Williamson; two of those players are permanent signings. 

And finally we paid money for two players this year. That one of them was a complete catastrophe for a player that won't kick a ball for us is again neither here nor there. We paid for him because McGlynn wanted to sign him. 

McGlynn was backed and he did not deliver. 

Edited April 26, 2022 by Michael W

[Jilted John]

1 hour ago, Michael W said:

Not having it that McGlynn wasn't well backed. Liam Dick may not have been first choice, but Berra will have been an expensive capture and I doubt James Keatings came cheaply either. That the latter was hopeless is neither here nor there. 

Pre-season is only one of the factors, though. We brought in players when the season was in progress, strengthening the squad in January. In came Stanton, Gullan and Williamson; two of those players are permanent signings. 

And finally we paid money for two players this year. That one of them was a complete catastrophe for a player that won't kick a ball for us is again neither here nor there. We paid for him because McGlynn wanted to sign him. 

McGlynn was backed and he did not deliver. 

Although I completely agree that the manager was backed, I’m struggling to agree that he hasn’t delivered.

Since he arrived he has had us promoted, reached the playoffs, won a cup, got to another cup final that wasn’t played and established us as a championship team, losing out on the playoffs by 3 points at worst.

Missing out on the playoffs is a bitter pill to swallow but let’s be honest, we wouldn’t have won them. To say you want him gone as he’s failed to deliver in his time here is completely bonkers. 
 

 

[CALDERON]

5 minutes ago, Jilted John said:

Although I completely agree that the manager was backed, I’m struggling to agree that he hasn’t delivered.

Since he arrived he has had us promoted, reached the playoffs, won a cup, got to another cup final that wasn’t played and established us as a championship team, losing out on the playoffs by 3 points at worst.

Missing out on the playoffs is a bitter pill to swallow but let’s be honest, we wouldn’t have won them. To say you want him gone as he’s failed to deliver in his time here is completely bonkers. 
 

 

Flip side is,  if you were offered where we are going to finish this season, knowing where we were at the half way mark and knowing we will have spent 6 figures on players from Oct onwards - would you have taken it? Or classed that as a successful season?

Mcglynn has been a massive success in this 2nd stint overall, but I don't think claiming that he has undelivered this season is unreasonable at all.

[Jilted John]

54 minutes ago, CALDERON said:

Flip side is,  if you were offered where we are going to finish this season, knowing where we were at the half way mark and knowing we will have spent 6 figures on players from Oct onwards - would you have taken it? Or classed that as a successful season?

Mcglynn has been a massive success in this 2nd stint overall, but I don't think claiming that he has undelivered this season is unreasonable at all.

Yeah you’re right, but surely you’d have to judge a slightly bigger picture than the last 4 months of league games to decide whether he needed to go. Had the season been flipped on it’s head and we had a poor start followed by a great run towards the end, we probably wouldn’t be having this discussion.

 

[CALDERON]

1 minute ago, Jilted John said:

Yeah you’re right, but surely you’d have to judge a slightly bigger picture than the last 4 months of league games to decide whether he needed to go. Had the season been flipped on it’s head and we had a poor start followed by a great run towards the end, we probably wouldn’t be having this discussion.

 

I agree, the decision not to keep Mcglynn is only as good as who he would be replaced with.

[Michael W]

1 hour ago, Jilted John said:

Although I completely agree that the manager was backed, I’m struggling to agree that he hasn’t delivered.

Since he arrived he has had us promoted, reached the playoffs, won a cup, got to another cup final that wasn’t played and established us as a championship team, losing out on the playoffs by 3 points at worst.

Missing out on the playoffs is a bitter pill to swallow but let’s be honest, we wouldn’t have won them. To say you want him gone as he’s failed to deliver in his time here is completely bonkers. 
 

 

He hasn't delivered this season, despite backing. I thought it was pretty clear from the post that that's what I was referring to. 

We have gone from a title challenge before Christmas to needing a miracle to secure a playoff place. This has come despite four players being signed in January to strengthen the squad and maintain our challenge. Instead, we fell by the wayside and embarked upon an utterly dismal run of form. This is failure to deliver. 

I would like him to go due to: 

1) A prolonged period of dreadful form, for which he carries much of the blame for; 

2) His part in the Goodwillie signing.

It's the way it goes. If we'd offered him an extension last season, I'd have been delighted. Up until even late January this year, I'd still have been happy. But offering him a new deal after the last four months? Not for me. 

 

Edited April 26, 2022 by Michael W

[Jilted John]

So you’d sack him after one bad run despite everything else he’s achieved? Even if you look at the players signed in January, they weren’t additions, they were replacements. Williamson and Stanton replaced Tait and Spencer. Gullan replaced Vaughan (then got injured himself) only Mackie was an addition to the squad. 
 

Personally I’d give him a 2yr deal and if we are unable to get a top 4 spot next season then it’s time to part ways. He’s got enough credit in the bank to deserve another crack IMO.

[renton]

16 minutes ago, Jilted John said:

So you’d sack him after one bad run despite everything else he’s achieved? Even if you look at the players signed in January, they weren’t additions, they were replacements. Williamson and Stanton replaced Tait and Spencer. Gullan replaced Vaughan (then got injured himself) only Mackie was an addition to the squad. 
 

Personally I’d give him a 2yr deal and if we are unable to get a top 4 spot next season then it’s time to part ways. He’s got enough credit in the bank to deserve another crack IMO.

It was a fairly catastrophic run of a similar scale that had fans wanting Murray sacked.

I get that context matters, and his good service should be taken into consideration. 

However, even putting the whole Goodwillie thing to one side, there have been odd decisions throughout the season, and at times he's looked lost and unable to turn it around. Like he'd tried out all his ideas and nothing was working.

My perception of it anyway. I'm fairly undecided on which way I want it to go. I don't think there is necessarily anyone better out there we'd attract. At the same time, I don't know what he's going to do that freshens us up for next season given how much of the squad is in place.

[Michael W]

26 minutes ago, Jilted John said:

So you’d sack him after one bad run despite everything else he’s achieved? Even if you look at the players signed in January, they weren’t additions, they were replacements. Williamson and Stanton replaced Tait and Spencer. Gullan replaced Vaughan (then got injured himself) only Mackie was an addition to the squad. 
 

Personally I’d give him a 2yr deal and if we are unable to get a top 4 spot next season then it’s time to part ways. He’s got enough credit in the bank to deserve another crack IMO.

3 league wins in 2022 (with the opportunity to hit the dizzy heights of 4) is unacceptable for a team fighting relegation let alone a team at the right end of the league. I don't think that can just be dismissed as a bad run tbh, it points to more fundamental failings. 

You are also choosing to ignore the full reasoning I think he should go and I'm not sure if that's a deliberate ommission or not. He had credit in the bank to weather a bad run, I agree; much of it was blown on the Goodwillie transfer. Being the only person that had to speak publicly on the matter (as little as he may have wanted to), he asked for the opportunity to put it right. The only way he can do that is by delivering on the pitch, and he didn't. The malaise was prolonged, with the positive results coming too late to salvage the playoffs. Had the issues been limited to solely a terrible run I would.potentially reconsider, but taking it as a whole, I think he should go. 

Injuries are part and parcel of a football season and that's what the squad is there for. We didn't have to bring in players to strengthen the squad, but we did. In some cases, this was because the players McGlynn brought in were not good enough. We had cover in midfield for Spencer, but Riley-Snow was not up to it. We had a perfectly decent striker all along, but McGlynn wouldn't play him. Mackie was similarly brought in as the LB signed in the summer isn't great. I thought the board showed plenty faith in McGlynn and really did give him the backing he deserved to try and get to where we wanted to. 

 

Edited April 26, 2022 by Michael W

[Brashy's Boots]

3 league wins in 2022 (with the opportunity to hit the dizzy heights of 4) is unacceptable for a team fighting relegation let alone a team at the right end of the league. I don't think that can just be dismissed as a bad run tbh, it points to more fundamental failings. 
You are also choosing to ignore the full reasoning I think he should go and I'm not sure if that's a deliberate ommission or not. He had credit in the bank to weather a bad run, I agree; much of it was blown on the Goodwillie transfer. Being the only person that had to speak publicly on the matter (as little as he may have wanted to), he asked for the opportunity to put it right. The only way he can do that is by delivering on the pitch, and he didn't. The malaise was prolonged, with the positive results coming too late to salvage the playoffs. Had the issues been limited to solely a terrible run I would.potentially reconsider, but taking it as a whole, I think he should go. 
Injuries are part and parcel of a football season and that's what the squad is there for. We didn't have to bring in players to strengthen the squad, but we did. In some cases, this was because the players McGlynn brought in were not good enough. We had cover in midfield for Spencer, but Riley-Snow was not up to it. We had a perfectly decent striker all along, but McGlynn wouldn't play him. Mackie was similarly brought in as the LB signed in the summer isn't great. I thought the board showed plenty faith in McGlynn and really did give him the backing he deserved to try and get to where we wanted to. 
 

If you were happy to offer him a new contract at the end of last season, and he had got one, would you have been clamouring for his dismissal now, costing us more £££ or would you have let him continue and rebuild?

[Ro Sham Bo]

If we do dish out a new contract I wouldn't be handing him more than a 12 month contract. I'm not convinced that we won't continue this form into next season and if we end up needing to get rid after a dozen games or so we don't want that to be on the back of a new 2 year contract.

[Michael W]

44 minutes ago, Brashy's Boots said:

2 hours ago, Michael W said:

3 league wins in 2022 (with the opportunity to hit the dizzy heights of 4) is unacceptable for a team fighting relegation let alone a team at the right end of the league. I don't think that can just be dismissed as a bad run tbh, it points to more fundamental failings. 
You are also choosing to ignore the full reasoning I think he should go and I'm not sure if that's a deliberate ommission or not. He had credit in the bank to weather a bad run, I agree; much of it was blown on the Goodwillie transfer. Being the only person that had to speak publicly on the matter (as little as he may have wanted to), he asked for the opportunity to put it right. The only way he can do that is by delivering on the pitch, and he didn't. The malaise was prolonged, with the positive results coming too late to salvage the playoffs. Had the issues been limited to solely a terrible run I would.potentially reconsider, but taking it as a whole, I think he should go. 
Injuries are part and parcel of a football season and that's what the squad is there for. We didn't have to bring in players to strengthen the squad, but we did. In some cases, this was because the players McGlynn brought in were not good enough. We had cover in midfield for Spencer, but Riley-Snow was not up to it. We had a perfectly decent striker all along, but McGlynn wouldn't play him. Mackie was similarly brought in as the LB signed in the summer isn't great. I thought the board showed plenty faith in McGlynn and really did give him the backing he deserved to try and get to where we wanted to. 
 

If you were happy to offer him a new contract at the end of last season, and he had got one, would you have been clamouring for his dismissal now, costing us more £££ or would you have let him continue and rebuild?

I don't know, in all honesty. It'd be a tougher call given the additional ramifications. It is a lot easier to simply not renew a contract than it is to fire someone; it gives you a natural break and is of course not going to cost money. I think I'd be veering towards leave, tbh, but it's difficult to answer hypotheticals. 

The decision to offer a new contract is essentially a reward. Previously it would have been merited, but after the last four months? Hard for me to see it. 

Whatever we're doing, we need to hurry up and do it. We will miss out on new players and hinder retention of current players that are out of contract if we don't act soon. Additionally, if we are not going to renew McGlynn's contract, he deserves a proper send off.